As Clinton stumbles in Pakistan, the White House spins.

[denem]

The White House has responded to criticism of Secretary of State Clinton in Pakistan.

As US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hit out at Pakistan for failing to crackdown on Al-Qaeda, the White House on Friday came out in support of her "straight talk" with Pakistani leaders.

"We have been in ongoing conversations with the Pakistanis about ways that they can address and go after violent extremists in their country that threaten both Pakistan and the US. So I think the remarks were completely appropriate," said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/oct/31/white-house-backs-clintons-straight-talk.htm

This is pure spin. Clinton's "straight talk" is no doubt effective behind closed doors. The fact of the matter is she was talking a to group of journalists:

"Al-Qaeda has had safe haven in Pakistan since 2002," she said. "I find it hard to believe that nobody in your government knows where they are and couldn't get them if they really wanted to. Maybe that's the case; maybe they're not gettable. I don't know."

The journalists were not impressed. As a mummer sprang up and Clinton backtracked, ending her answer with "I don't know" didn't help.

“Look Madam Secretary, we are fighting a war that is imposed on us, that is not our war, it is your war and we are fighting it,” said Asma Shirazi of ARY channel, to much applause from the audience. “You had one 9/11 and we are having daily 9/11s”.

Hindustan Times: http://www.hindustantimes.com/Clinton-talks-tough/H1-Ar...

According to the BBC World Service NewsHour anti-American sentiment is rising. The message, 'Pakistan should do more' could not have come at a less opportune time. http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2009/03/000000_newshour.shtml
(sorry audio only)

According to Professor Anatol Lieven of Kings College London, Clinton failed, first and foremost, to acknowledge the "enormous effort" already undertaken. "Under Musharraf, Pakistan very much concentrated on arresting Al-Qaeda operatives and leaders and arrested several hundreds of them and handed them over to the Americans, more than anywhere else in the world (including Afghanistan over the same period)"

Hamid Mir the Executive Editor or GEO TV said "I think she's here just for a charm diplomatic offensive.. But when we asked her some pertinent .. questions she had no answers. (Why) right in the middle of the Pakistani's army operations why have the US and NATO troops ... vacated the check post on the Afghanistan-Pakistan boarder? She had no answer." ... "Our Parliament have adopted an unanimous resolution against us drone attacks, why have you not taken any care ... why you not listened to the voice of democracy in Pakistan". She had no answer."

The Secretary of State also drew comment for suggesting that the Pakistani Government raise taxes (or more vigorously collect taxes) in order to provide welfare, and alleviate poverty for the most disadvantaged.

In fairness, expressing US Policy was never going to be very popular in Pakistan, but this charm offensive appears to have fallen flat.

[firedupdem]

1. “You had one 9/11 and we are having daily 9/11s”.

ouch!

[denem]

3. Reply: You should do more.

[snagglepuss]

6. She should have said: You should have DONE more instead of making

deals with fanatics. They wouldn't haven't to be doing more now if they hadn't made these deals.

Chickens are simply coming home to roost for the well to do and middle class Pakistanis who have sat by for years never improving the plight of its poor yet estastic that billions were spent on developing a pointless nuclear bomb.

[denem]

7. "(Your) Chickens are simply coming home to roost" WAY TO GO.

That will win hearts and minds. You should join the State Department Pronto.

[BeHereNow]

10. Well, she IS a protege of "We think it was worth it" Madeline Albright.

Sticking her foot in her mouth comes from tutelage at the feet of a master.
Raising taxes to help the people.
Back here in America, the wealthy simply don't pay taxes.
What a fucking stupid thing to suggest.
"Do as we say, not as we do..."
Hypocrites, all of them.

BHN

[snagglepuss]

27. Your comparing apples with oranges. However bad the US is in terms of

taxes, Pakistan is a whole lot worse. From the Generals on down it is a totally corrupt state, and its been that way since generals/dictators have held power which is almost as long as Pakistan has been a country.

I take it that you must think Bush's make-nice approach to Pakistan worked.

[snagglepuss]

18. Its the truth. Pakistani generals have always believed that they can be

puppetmasters, playing different sides against each other while protecting their own interests and grip on power. Bush went out of his way to compliment and make nice with Mushareff and how did that work out?

Clinton is being honest. Frankly I don't think there is a way to win Pakistani hearts and minds because Pakistan is such a diverse country.

What do you think she should have said?

[denem]

9. Hypocrite: "never improving the plight of its poor yet estastic" about the bomb

What the fuck about US military spending vs improving the plight of the poor". Pathetic.

[BeHereNow]

11. Bwahahhahaha! See my post above yours.

I said exactly the same thing.

BHN

[denem]

13. You didn't mention US poverty vs Military Spending.

Fail. Some self righteous poster criticises Pakistan for its poverty. Pathetic.

[BeHereNow]

16. I think you misunderstood and I certainly was not criticizing poverty in Pakistan.

I think it goes with out saying, the fact that US poverty is completely
unmentioned when tallying the military spending of this military led empire.

I was criticizing the hypocrisy of Clinton advocating that Pakistan
take care of its poor through taxation.
As if that were the case in this country.
I believe we need to clean up our fucked up mess
at home, including a congress complicit with the MIC,
before we go telling other people what to do.

BHN

[snagglepuss]

20. Nothing in my post even vaguely suggests that I'm defending US nuclear

industry. Two separate issues. That your even mentioning US spending is pathetic. It is a indisputable fact that had Pakistan spent the money it spent on developing the bomb on educating its poor, it wouldn't be in the position its in now.

[snagglepuss]

36. Hypocrite that is rich, coming from someone clueless about Pakistan and

shooting your mouth off.

"Retired and serving officers run secretive industrial conglomerates, manufacture everything from cement to cornflakes, and own 12 million acres of public land..."The Pakistani military's private business empire could be worth as much as $20 billion, according to a ground-breaking study. "


Dr Ayesha Siddiqa, author of Military Inc: Inside Pakistan's Military Economy and a former director of research at the Pakistan navy
"estimates that the military controls one-third of all heavy manufacturing and up to 7% of private assets.


"Profits are supposed to be pumped back into schools, hospitals and other welfare facilities - the military claims it has 9 million beneficiaries - but there is little transparency. "There is little evidence that pensioners are benefiting from these welfare facilities," she said.

[denem]

45. Military Inc? Yes I know there is a wealthy Military-Industrial complex in Pakistan

Your point is?

[bigtree]

23. we just tripled aid to the country

outside of sprinkling it down from the air, there isn't much more than that we can (or should) do in Pakistan.

[snagglepuss]

34. You missed my point. Pakistani Generals and their supporters have

bled Pakistan dry and continue to bleed it. How much foreign aid actually gets to the poor? All that aid is siphoned off. They control vast amounts of wealth that do not circulate down to the masses. The poor do not have access education which is why so many poor kids end up being indoctrinated in Madrasses. There has to be pressure to change the system and the US which has pumped billions into it has some legitmacy in saying there has to be systemic changes.

[denem]

46. Pakistanis have the opposite take on that: It's here's the money, now

do our bidding. For example "Carl Levin: No US aid until Pakistan takes on militants":http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2009/03/carl_levin_no_us_aid_until_pak.html

[Ruby the Liberal]

14. That is the bottom line, IMO.

Mr. President, call it a "victory" and get our men and women OUT of the region.

[malaise]

26. They're right n/t

[Number23]

42. I knew the second, the MILISECOND that I read her comments that her shit was about to blow up

The "I don't know" part at the end in no way salvages or lessens what she said. It was tactless at best.

[snagglepuss]

2. I'm not a Clinton fan but IMO she was speaking her mind. Many in US and Pakistan would complain

that she was not saying anything substantial if she had been any less forthright.

[denem]

4. 'You can do more', was the wrong message given the mounting casualties

civilian AND military. She could not have been more off key. YES it's the long standing US position, but timing is everyting, THEN telling the Pakistani Government THEY should raise welfare?

[Whisp]

22. as she is no diplomat, she should be more careful

arrogance and know it allness, oozing with superiority.
she does not do well under pressure as her focus is fuzzy and she has no honest base to work from.

not good work at all. antagonizing is not the way this admin wants to work.

[scarletwoman]

5. Way to be diplomatic, Ms. Clinton. I couldn't believe she said that shit. Extraordinarily rude.

Isn't the Sec. of State supposed to be, like, the top U.S. diplomat?

Diplomats don't diss their hosts in public.

sw

[BeHereNow]

17. That why I referenced her mentor, Ms. Albright.

Apparently some had no idea what i was talking about.
Sigh...
BHN

[Whisp]

Its a price the Pakistanis have to pay....

for American folly and mass murder.
:sarcasm:

[Laelth]

8. Whoops. Those are two regrettable errors.

Nobody's perfect, and she's still learning the job, but hat could have been handled better.

Jet lag, perhaps?

:shrug:

:dem:

-Laelth

[karynnj]

41. Not likely she'd been there for a while

I suspect it was that being in Pakistan was extremely uncomfortable, because they are very prickly and feel that weren't giving them appropriate respect and credit for what they were doing and they were really angry that the aid bill had conditions that had to met. (Here is a link to an article on Senator Kerry's trip that shows the degree of hostility and lack of trust. http://thenews.com.pk/print1.asp?id=204382 )

[Laelth]

49. Thanks for the link. It is informative.

I still think the Secretary made a mistake and could have handled this matter in a better fashion.

:dem:

-Laelth

[karynnj]

53. I would agree, but I also think that the situation was extremely difficult

Reading various accounts, Kerry got pounded hard on many of the same issues, leading to reports that he was weary, frustrated, and disappointed, rather than angry as Clinton was described. You can see in that account that they twisted everything in ways that defy reason. The sarcasm that Kerry would want to recheck the exact language in a bill for a clause written in the House is silly - and something he often does in the Senate. Now, Holbrooke and Clinton know that Kerry is amazingly able to stay cool and to reach out even when people are hostile. They should have known from this, that any American would face hostility. HRC, as a prominent member of the administration was certain to be a target.

This meant that they should have planned the trip in a way to maximize her chance for success. Looking at the way they set it up, they likely came close to doing the opposite. The only thing I can think is that they assumed that, given her history and "star power", most would be happy to see her.

From Holbrooke's descriptions, they wanted to use her history and star power to reach out to the people as well as have the standard meetings. In hindsight, the events they put HRC in exposed her to a level of hostility that surprised them and her. The fact is the articles on Kerry's trip and the fact that Holbrooke had difficulties earlier in the year with them should have made them see this as a very risky thing to do - not to mention exceedingly unpleasant for HRC. (They could have given her the chance for outreach with a combination of ceremonial events and an in studio interview with a respected Pakistani news person.) It does show how tough things are that a trip where she was able to announce specific projects that the aid will fund was almost completely hostile.

[Vinnie From Indy]

12. I see nothing wrong with her comments

Pakistan has sheltered Al Queda for years and they have been at the center of nuclear proliferation with A.Q. Kahn. Also, they have been a real democracy only after Musharraf agreed to give up power.

In addition, claiming the we have imposed this war on the Pakistanis is nonsense. The ISI in Pakistan is and has been hip deep with the Taliban. The war was "imposed on them" because they give shelter to those that attacked us.

[denem]

15. The county's at war. A hundred Civilians killed when she arrives. SoS - You can do more.

However accurate, it's not diplomatic.

[msongs]

19. it's Obama's war. she is just caught in the middle between him and pakistanis nt

[Whisp]

28. her war is in Iraq. You're right, she should resign if she is as helpless as you suggest.

[Number23]

43. **an army of facepalms**

Worst comment I've seen today...

[bigtree]

21. spin?

looks to me like she's doing just what they sent her there for.

The right has been harping on this all day. I think she's right that Pakistan could 'do more' behind all of the U.S. money we just appropriated (tripling aid), despite the fact that she might have offended some there.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

24. She done fucked up.

Again.

[spanone]

25. i was not aware that clinton 'stumbled'. the truth is not stumbling.

[Whisp]

29. she's trying to be 'tough' again and doesn't get it...

being tough isn't being rude, she just doesn't get it.

[spanone]

30. i believe she gets it.

nothing wrong with the truth.

[Whisp]

35. she does not do well under pressure.

up till now most of what I have seen or heard of her work I think has been prepared and delivered easily without contest or criticism and I was pleased that she seemed to be so self assured and confidant, she had a good presence I thought. I could be mistaken but this may be her first 'real' assignment where there was no guarantee of an applauding crowd.

When she became surprised in this situation she resorted to kneejerk bullying and anger instead of staying calm and handling it at the very least without using insults.

she cracked under pressure, that is not a good thing for the SOS or the world.

[spanone]

37. what a warped interpretation. 'she became surprised' 'kneejerk bullying and anger'

warped.

[Whisp]

39. if this report is correct, she appeared to be out of her element

She couldn't answer some pertinent questions and lost her cool and went on the offensive.

how is that warped to think a SOS should be in better control?

Do you think this was the proper way to handle such a tense situation?
I don't.
That my opinion.

[Skip Intro]

33. No, the truth is not stumbling. Bored Hillary bashers feel like throwing some rocks is all. n/t

[lib2DaBone]

31. Hillary is a Schill for Goldman Sacs....

Bring Our Troops Home. End of Story. Fuck the CFR, Fuck Hillary...

[femrap]

48. Gee....who

was just in NYC raising lots and lots of campaign funds for the Dems??? Wall Street put someone in office and it wasn't Hillary. Be careful of where you are calling a Schill for Goldman Sachs.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

32. "Bad puppet! Bad puppet!", says Hillary, diplomatically.

[UTUSN]

38. Where is the part that she "STUMBLED"?!1 n/t

[denem]

50. Stumbling = inflaming public anti-American sentiment, as the BBC reported.

The distinction between public and private is basic diplomacy.

[JVS]

40. Jesus. What a fucking dumb thing to say!

[DefenseLawyer]

44. Not done enough?

If you look at the ISI's role in training al-qaeda and laundering saudi money, I'd say Pakistan has done more than enough.

[denem]

51. The ISI was not intimately involved with al-qaeda. It comes down to race.

Al-qaeda's leaders were Arab, not Pashtun. Their links were informal at best.

[DefenseLawyer]

52. You are mistaken

Utterly. If it "all comes down to race", are you saying that the Taliban's links to al-Qaeda are "informal at best"?

[Jim Sagle]

47. Remember, folks...the primaries are over.

:boring:

[karynnj]

54. No one is talking about the primaries here --- but you

I did not support HRC in the primaries and I think the State Department's bad planning sandbagged Clinton. If you would have read any of the accounts in the last couple of months, there is a huge wave of anti-American hostility now in a country that has had anti- American attitudes for decades.

Reading the accounts of Kerry's trip there, where he was pounded with suspicion and anger over a bill designed t provide humanitarian assistance, Holbrooke and others who planned HRC's trip should never have put her in a town hall type appearance.